COLLEGE GUIDE · COURSE REVIEW

What Should a College Continuing-Education Team Check Before Adding an Outside Course to Its Catalog?

Look closely at the learner, the learning materials, and the work of delivering the course. Then make the next decision through your institution’s own review process.

8 min readFor continuing-education administrators and program teams

Ask to see the course behind the description. A catalog decision deserves evidence about the learning and the work of delivering it.

Start with learner fit, a complete sample activity, clear delivery responsibilities, accessibility evidence, and the review route that applies at your college.

This guide suggests questions for an externally developed, noncredit course. It draws on named institutional examples and public teaching guidance. Use it to prepare a review conversation; your institution determines its requirements and who can make each decision.

First, identify the arrangement

An individual instructor proposing a class, a provider licensing a finished course, and a partner developing new material present different questions. Name the arrangement before choosing forms, requesting evidence, or assuming responsibilities.

01 · PURPOSE & FIT

Start with the learner and catalog fit

Ask the provider to describe a specific learner, the knowledge needed to begin, and something that learner should be able to do after the course. Compare that purpose with nearby offerings in your catalog.

Then ask what supports the proposed need. A topic missing from the catalog is a reason to investigate. By itself, it does not establish learner interest or likely enrollment.

The intended learnerWho is this for, what do they already know, and when would they use the skill?
The catalog fitWhat does the proposed course add? Where does it overlap with an existing offering?
The evidence of needWhat evidence supports the provider’s description of learner interest? What still needs checking locally?

Central Oregon Community College asks prospective instructors about learning outcomes, the audience, delivery preference, community need, existing offerings, and their qualifications.
Cabrillo College Extension identifies course content, instructor background, and potential audience interest as review considerations. It also asks prospective instructors to examine its catalog.

Confirm what your institution needs

These are examples of instructor proposal processes. They do not establish a purchasing process for a packaged course or prove demand for any proposed offering.

02 · EVIDENCE OF LEARNING

Examine what a learner would do

Request one complete activity with its intended outcome, learner instructions, supporting material, and review criteria. If a sample response is supplied, ask whether it is an invented example or actual learner work shared with permission.

Carnegie Mellon’s Eberly Center recommends choosing assessments in relation to the intended learning. Its guidance asks what student work would reveal about the ability being assessed. For a course reviewer, that means reading the task and the criteria together.

Three sheets show a proposed learner task, a worked planning example, and a review-criteria grid examined with a magnifying glass — **Connect the intended skill, the work, and the criteria.** Each part should help a reviewer understand what the activity asks the learner to demonstrate.

Read the instructionsCan the learner tell what to do, what to produce, and what resources to use?
Look at the expected workWould completing the task make the intended skill visible?
Read the criteriaDo they explain what the reviewer looks for in that work?
Check the teachingDoes the supplied material prepare the learner for the activity?

This is a suggested inspection method. A well-presented sample can clarify the design, but it does not establish that a course has produced learning or employment outcomes. Request separate evidence for any such claim.

03 · RESPONSIBILITIES

Name the delivery and support owners

A review also needs a practical account of how the course would run. Ask about the delivery format, required technology, learner contact, and material updates. Record the proposed owner for each responsibility.

The public Quality Matters CPE rubric overview includes course technology and learner support alongside learning objectives, assessment, materials, and activities. Its scope covers structured online or hybrid noncredit courses with completion criteria. We use that overview to frame questions, without implying a formal QM review or certification.

Teaching and feedbackWho teaches, answers subject questions, and reviews learner work? What is the plan for a self-paced course?
Access and technologyWhere does the course run? What accounts, software, and files are needed? Who resolves access problems?
Updates and changesWho maintains the material, decides when a change is needed, and communicates it?
Rights and handoffsWhat uses of the materials are covered, and what must the college and provider each supply?

Responsibilities to confirm

SkillShiftEd’s partnership guide also raises questions about development, publishing, updates, rights, and decisions. Those questions do not establish a particular agreement. Hosting, support, and other college-partner commitments need approved, project-specific answers.

04 · THE LEARNER EXPERIENCE

Ask for accessibility evidence

Ask to inspect the actual lesson, documents, media, and activities. Review the path a learner would take to access the material, understand the instructions, complete the work, and receive feedback.

W3C’s Easy Checks guidance explains that a quick first review covers only a few accessibility issues. A page may appear to pass those checks while substantial barriers remain. More assessment is needed for a comprehensive evaluation.

A laptop lesson, separate keyboard, paper handout, magnifying glass, and notebook are arranged for a first accessibility inspection — **Inspect the materials and the learner’s path.** Record what was examined, what remains uncertain, and who should assess it next.

Available evidenceWhat has already been reviewed, by whom, and which version did they examine?
Known issuesWhat barriers have been identified? Who is responsible for addressing them?
The full experienceWhat still needs inspection across documents, media, navigation, activities, and feedback?
The local reviewWhich institutional owner determines the required assessment and next steps?

Keep the limits of the review visible

Captions, attractive design, or a short checklist do not establish that a course is accessible. This guide provides no accessibility finding about a course. Use your institution’s review process to determine what evidence and further assessment are needed.

05 · THE DECISION

Follow your institution’s review route

Identify the institution’s owner for the proposed arrangement. Ask which academic, accessibility, technology, privacy, purchasing, or agreement reviews apply. The answer belongs to the institution and the particular offering.

For example, Central Washington University’s course proposal page requests a proposal, a resume or CV, and a signed handbook page. It describes further discussion when a proposal appears to fit community needs and connects CE coursework to its mission and an academic unit. Those are CWU’s stated requirements for that route.

Choose the routeWhich process covers this type of instructor, licensed course, or development arrangement?
Name the reviewersWho needs the evidence, and who can request changes or make a decision?
Define this decisionIs the request for further review, a revision, or a decision about a specific next step?

Review is one decision at a time

An invitation to discuss a course does not authorize a catalog listing, launch, credit award, or certification claim. Confirm what has actually been approved and by whom before describing the offering publicly.

06 · YOUR NEXT STEP

Keep a short, usable review record

Keep a short record that another reviewer can use without reconstructing the conversation. We recommend five fields for each open question. Link to the exact sample or document version examined.

Question: What does the team need to know before the next decision?
Evidence supplied: Which material answers the question, and where can a reviewer find it?
Evidence missing: What remains unclear or needs another sample, explanation, or assessment?
Owner: Who will supply the answer, and who will review it?
Next decision: What can be decided once that evidence is available?

One possible next step is to request revised activity instructions and criteria before continuing the review. That is an illustrative decision, not an accepted proposal or a promised result. Record the actual next step your team agrees to.

College contact route

Colleges can reach SkillShiftEd at partners@skillshifted.com. This guide does not establish a dedicated intake route or response commitment beyond that contact.

START WITH ONE OPEN QUESTION

Make the next review useful.

Choose the question that matters most, gather the relevant evidence, and name the person who can make the next decision.

Use the five-field review record